Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
After more than a year of discussion, the Chico City Council still has yet to place an ordinance regulating the cultivation, processing and distribution of medical marijuana by collectives and cooperatives on the books.
But after Tuesday night's council meeting, the city is one step closer to its potential adoption.
Since 2009, the council has attempted to address collectives and cooperatives in the city and has been vetting a potential ordinance for several months. City staff estimated the ordinance has cost the city at least $20,000 in staff time.
The ordinance was not approved by the council Tuesday night, but progress continued, as the council added a limit on the number of dispensaries that would be allowed in the city and defined the permit process dispensaries must follow.
The council decided to limit the number of dispensaries to two and decided that the City Council will determine the applicants who will receive permits to operate.
With most of the work on the ordinance completed and the language of it well-vetted, the ordinance is now expected to come up for potential adoption within the next few months.
Though that adoption was supported by several speakers Tuesday night, including former Sacramento City Councilor Robbie Waters, Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey argued that the ordinance was not necessary.
Ramsey said the city's municipal code already prohibits collectives and cooperatives and that the problems mitigated by ordinances in other cities are not present in Chico.
"You don't need to reign in something that isn't here," Ramsey said. "Currently you cannot have dispensaries in the city of Chico. Your code enforcement is taking care of that right now."
Still, the council continued moving forward on the ordinance Tuesday, and is expected to ultimately make a final decision on it by this summer.
In addition to the medical marijuana ordinance, the Chico City Council Tuesday night considered a ballot initiative that aims to move the city's general municipal election from November to June.
The initiative, which will require an amendment to the city's charter, was recently verified by the Butte County Clerk's Office to have the number of signatures required to be put to a vote. The petitioners needed 6,623 to place the measure on the ballot and the county projected that 7,760 valid signatures were collected.
Tuesday night, the council was asked to determine when to hold an election on the initiative and whether to hold a precinct election or strictly vote-by-mail election.
Chico City Clerk Debbie Presson noted that the council could not simply adopt the measure as a charter amendment, because the petition called for a special election.
She emphasized that the council had no choice on whether the matter would go to a vote of Chico citizens, and could only determine how that election would be conducted.
Despite that, several members of the council, as well as members of the public, took time Tuesday to express their dissatisfaction with the merits of the initiative.
Councilor Jim Walker said he disagreed with the manner in which the signatures were collected, saying he felt as though signature collectors misrepresented the purpose of the initiative.
He said he was disappointed that an election will be held on the initiative.
"I really can't tell you how angry I've been that this moved forward," Walker said. "It seems to be a travesty of democracy."
Still, as Chico resident Bob Kromer pointed out, enough Chico voters have expressed support for holding an election on the matter and Kromer said the city should allow the election to go forward.
Ultimately, by a unanimous vote, the council decided to hold the election on June 7, should a statewide election be held on that date. If a statewide election is called for a later date in June, the city will have the ability to hold the election on that date. If no election is called, the city of Chico will hold a standalone election.
The council also unanimously voted to hold an election that includes precincts.
A vote-by-mail election is estimated to cost the city $95,000, and a precinct election is estimated to cost $151,000. The funding would come out of the city's general fund.
Walker said he understood the higher cost of a precinct election, but said he supported a method of voting that would increase voter turnout and offer the most opportunity for voter participation.
The council also unanimously designated Scott Gruendl as the author of the argument against the ballot initiative. The elections code allows a legislative body to submit an argument in opposition to a measure placed on the ballot by petition.
NewsHawk: Jim Behr: 420 MAGAZINE
Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA)
Copyright: 2011 Chico Enterprise-Record
Contact: letters@chicoer.com
Website: Home - Chico Enterprise Record
Details: MapInc
Author: Toni Scott
But after Tuesday night's council meeting, the city is one step closer to its potential adoption.
Since 2009, the council has attempted to address collectives and cooperatives in the city and has been vetting a potential ordinance for several months. City staff estimated the ordinance has cost the city at least $20,000 in staff time.
The ordinance was not approved by the council Tuesday night, but progress continued, as the council added a limit on the number of dispensaries that would be allowed in the city and defined the permit process dispensaries must follow.
The council decided to limit the number of dispensaries to two and decided that the City Council will determine the applicants who will receive permits to operate.
With most of the work on the ordinance completed and the language of it well-vetted, the ordinance is now expected to come up for potential adoption within the next few months.
Though that adoption was supported by several speakers Tuesday night, including former Sacramento City Councilor Robbie Waters, Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey argued that the ordinance was not necessary.
Ramsey said the city's municipal code already prohibits collectives and cooperatives and that the problems mitigated by ordinances in other cities are not present in Chico.
"You don't need to reign in something that isn't here," Ramsey said. "Currently you cannot have dispensaries in the city of Chico. Your code enforcement is taking care of that right now."
Still, the council continued moving forward on the ordinance Tuesday, and is expected to ultimately make a final decision on it by this summer.
In addition to the medical marijuana ordinance, the Chico City Council Tuesday night considered a ballot initiative that aims to move the city's general municipal election from November to June.
The initiative, which will require an amendment to the city's charter, was recently verified by the Butte County Clerk's Office to have the number of signatures required to be put to a vote. The petitioners needed 6,623 to place the measure on the ballot and the county projected that 7,760 valid signatures were collected.
Tuesday night, the council was asked to determine when to hold an election on the initiative and whether to hold a precinct election or strictly vote-by-mail election.
Chico City Clerk Debbie Presson noted that the council could not simply adopt the measure as a charter amendment, because the petition called for a special election.
She emphasized that the council had no choice on whether the matter would go to a vote of Chico citizens, and could only determine how that election would be conducted.
Despite that, several members of the council, as well as members of the public, took time Tuesday to express their dissatisfaction with the merits of the initiative.
Councilor Jim Walker said he disagreed with the manner in which the signatures were collected, saying he felt as though signature collectors misrepresented the purpose of the initiative.
He said he was disappointed that an election will be held on the initiative.
"I really can't tell you how angry I've been that this moved forward," Walker said. "It seems to be a travesty of democracy."
Still, as Chico resident Bob Kromer pointed out, enough Chico voters have expressed support for holding an election on the matter and Kromer said the city should allow the election to go forward.
Ultimately, by a unanimous vote, the council decided to hold the election on June 7, should a statewide election be held on that date. If a statewide election is called for a later date in June, the city will have the ability to hold the election on that date. If no election is called, the city of Chico will hold a standalone election.
The council also unanimously voted to hold an election that includes precincts.
A vote-by-mail election is estimated to cost the city $95,000, and a precinct election is estimated to cost $151,000. The funding would come out of the city's general fund.
Walker said he understood the higher cost of a precinct election, but said he supported a method of voting that would increase voter turnout and offer the most opportunity for voter participation.
The council also unanimously designated Scott Gruendl as the author of the argument against the ballot initiative. The elections code allows a legislative body to submit an argument in opposition to a measure placed on the ballot by petition.
NewsHawk: Jim Behr: 420 MAGAZINE
Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA)
Copyright: 2011 Chico Enterprise-Record
Contact: letters@chicoer.com
Website: Home - Chico Enterprise Record
Details: MapInc
Author: Toni Scott
